1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

At the time of the accident, the part of the left side of the Defendant vehicle that was rounded to the left at the intersection of the distance in front of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in front of the Sinam-dong University Hospital at the time of the accident to the left is 1,917,400 won (=2,117,400 won for the repair of the Plaintiff’s vehicle - 200,000 won for the self-paid vehicle) on February 1, 2019, where the accident occurred on January 28, 2019 at the time of the accident and around 07:40,000,000 won for the secured self-paid vehicle damage security insurance on February 1, 2019. There is no dispute over the background of the accident in this case [based on recognition], Gap’s evidence 1-6, Eul’s evidence 1-4, and Eul’s evidence or video.

2. In light of the following circumstances, the instant accident was caused by the common negligence of the driver of the original Defendant’s vehicle, and the negligence ratio is reasonable to regard the Plaintiff’s vehicle as 10% and 90% of the Defendant’s vehicle.

(1) Where a driver of any motor vehicle intends to make a right-hand side at an intersection, he/she shall proceed slowly to the right-hand side of the road in advance.

(Article 25 (1) of the Road Traffic Act). However, the defendant's vehicle entered a two-lane road bypassing it, without entering the two-lane road, immediately.

On the other hand, the plaintiff's vehicle entered a normal one-lane according to the new code for left-hand turn, so the main negligence in the accident of this case is the driver of the defendant vehicle.

② However, even though the Plaintiff’s driver was aware that the Defendant’s vehicle, who entered the intersection, was bypassing the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to

3. Conclusion, the Defendant, as to the Plaintiff’s indemnity amounting to KRW 1,705,660 (=1,905,660 (=total damages amounting to KRW 2,117,40 x 90% of the fault ratio of the Defendant’s vehicle x 90% of the Defendant’s vehicle x 200,000) and its payment date of insurance money, raises a dispute over the scope of the Defendant’s obligation to perform from March 1, 2019.